Shri Sunilbhai Chimanlal Patel, Ahmedabad V. The Dy.CIT.,Circle-11, Ahmedabad

ITA 669/AHD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9683 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 3 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-07-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 14-07-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 20-03-2012
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NARENDRA SINGHSR D R

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ././ ./ ITA NO. 669/AHD/2012 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 SUNILBHAI CHIMANLAL PATEL SAHAKARI LATHI BAZAR, JAGANATHJI MANDIR ROAD, GITA MANDIR, AHMEDABAD PAN : AEJPP 0227 K VS. DCIT, CIRCLE-11, AHMEDABAD / // / (APPELLANT) / // / (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE(S) BY : MS ARTI N SHAH, AR REVENUE BY : SHRI NARENDRA SINGH, SR DR !' # $%&/ // / DATE OF HEARING : 14/07/2015 '( # $%& / // / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 17/07/2015 )* )* )* )*/ // / O R D E R PER G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT: THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND IS DIRE CTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEAL S)-XVI, AHMEDABAD DATED 26.12.2011, PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 8-09. 2. THE ONLY GROUND RAISED IN THIS APPEAL BY THE ASS ESSEE READS AS UNDER:- THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-XV I, AHMEDABAD HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS OF THE CASE IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.4,02,802/- CONSISTING OF SUPPRESSED SALES OF RS. 2,33,532/- AND SUPPRESSED GROSS PROFIT OF RS.1,69,270/- OUT OF THE TOTAL ADDI TION OF RS.10,79,176/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 3. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE M ATERIAL PLACED BEFORE US. THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE THE ADDITION OF UNACCOUNTED SALES AT RS.10,79,176/-. ON APPEAL, THE CIT(A) REDUCED THE SAME TO RS.4,02,802/- WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS:- ITA NO. 669/AHD/2012 SUNILBHAI CHIMANLAL PATEL VS. DCIT AY 2008-09 2 2.3 THE APPELLANT HAD DISCLOSED THE GROSS PROFIT O F RS.8,01,858/- (12%) AS PER AUDITED ACCOUNTS. THE GROSS PROFIT ON THE SALE S OF RS.68,03,755/- THUS WORK OUT TO RS.9,71,128/-. THE ASSESSEE HAD DISCLO SED THE GROSS PROFIT OF RS.8,01,858/- THEREFORE, THE FURTHER ADDITION OF RS .1,69,270/- IS MADE IN THE GROSS PROFIT. THE FIGURES OF UNACCOUNTED STOCK IS R EPLACED BY THE GROSS PROFIT ADDITION OF RS.1,69,270/-. THE ASSESSING OFFICER H AD TAKEN THE DIFFERENCE OF RS.10,79,176/- IN THE SALES WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE SALES RETURN AND THE VAT PAID/PAYABLE. THUS, THE ADDITION OF RS.2,33,532/- IS SUSTAINED ON ACCOUNT OF SUPPRESSED SALES AND ADDITION OF RS.1,69,270/- IS M ADE ON ACCOUNT OF SUPPRESSED GROSS PROFIT. THUS THE ADDITION OF RS.4, 02,802/- IS SUSTAINED OUT OF THE ADDITION OF RS.10,79,176/- AND REST OF THE A DDITION IS DELETED. THE FIRST TO FOURTH GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE ACCORDINGLY PARTLY ALLOWED. 4. THE ASSESSEE, AGGRIEVED WITH THE ORDER OF THE CI T(A), IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US WHILE THE REVENUE HAS ACCEPTED THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). 5. FROM THE ABOVE IT IS EVIDENT THAT THE CIT(A) SUS TAINED THE ADDITION OF RS.2,33,532/- ON ACCOUNT OF SUPPRESSED SALES AND RS .1,69,270/- ON ACCOUNT OF SUPPRESSED GROSS PROFIT. AFTER CONSIDERING THE ARGUMENTS OF BOTH THE SIDES, IN OUR OPINION, ONCE THE ADDITION OF RS.2,33 ,532/- IS MADE ON ACCOUNT OF SUPPRESSED SALES, IT WILL INCREASE THE GROSS PRO FIT OF THE ASSESSEE BY RS.2,33,532/- AND THEREFORE, NO SEPARATE ADDITION O N ACCOUNT OF SUPPRESSED GROSS PROFIT AMOUNTING TO RS.1,69,270/- IS REQUIRED TO BE MADE. IN VIEW OF ABOVE, WE DEEM IT PROPER TO SUSTAIN THE ADDITION OF RS.2,33,532/- AS AGAINST RS.4,02,802/-. THUS, THE ASSESSEE GETS THE RELIEF OF RS.1,69,270/-. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS PARTLY A LLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 17 TH JULY, 2015 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- SD/- (S. S. GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER (G.D. AGRAWAL) VICE-PRESIDENT AHMEDABAD; DATED 17/07/2015 BIJU T., PS ITA NO. 669/AHD/2012 SUNILBHAI CHIMANLAL PATEL VS. DCIT AY 2008-09 3 )* # $+ ,)+$ )* # $+ ,)+$ )* # $+ ,)+$ )* # $+ ,)+$/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. $ !- / CONCERNED CIT 4. !- ( ) / THE CIT(A) 5. +01 $ , , / D R, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. 13 4' / GUARD FILE . )*! )*! )*! )*! / BY ORDER, TRUE COPY 5 55 5/ // / 6 6 6 6 ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , , , , / ITAT, AHMEDABAD